Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines
Unit Code BN208
Unit Title Networked Applications
Assessment Type Individual Assignment #02 (T3_2017)
Assessment Title Analyze Network Performance
Prepared by Mr. Naveed Dilber
Moderated by Dr. Fariza Sabrina
Purpose of the assessment (with ULO Mapping) This assignment is designed to develop student’s analytical understanding of different distributed network conditions.
At the completion of this assignment, students should be able to:
d) Discuss performance and deployment issues for networked applications;
e) Utilise appropriate industry tools and techniques to manage networked applications.
Weight 15%
Total Marks 50
Word limit 1000 – 1500
Due Date 2nd February, 2018 (23:55)
Submission Guidelines • All work must be submitted on Moodle by the due date along with a completed Assessment Cover Page.
• The assessment must be in MS Word format, 1.15 spacing, 12-pt Calibri (Body) font and normal margins on all four sides of your page with appropriate section headings.
• Reference sources must be cited in the text of the report, and listed appropriately at the end in a reference list using IEEE referencing style.
• The report should be in MS word format submitted on Moodle on time.
Extension If an extension of time to submit work is required, a Special Consideration Application must be submitted directly to the School's Administration Officer, in Melbourne on Level 6 or in Sydney on Level 7. You must submit this application three working days prior to the due date of the assessment. Further information is available at:
http://www.mit.edu.au/about-mit/institute-publications/policies- procedures-and-guidelines/specialconsiderationdeferment
Academic Misconduct
Academic Misconduct is a serious offence. Depending on the seriousness of the case, penalties can vary from a written warning or zero marks to exclusion from the course or rescinding the degree. Students should make themselves familiar with the full policy and procedure available at:
http://www.mit.edu.au/about-mit/institute-publications/policies- procedures-and-guidelines/Plagiarism-Academic-Misconduct-Policy- Procedure.
Assignment #02 Description
This assignment is designed to develop student’s analytical skills in addition to Wireshark utilisation to capture data from live network traffic. Through the laboratories, students have learned how to analyze HTTP packets, TCP packets streams, and audio streaming with TCP. Students have learned to identify the performance parameters such as load distribution, throughput graph, time sequence graph, flow graph and window scaling graph.
Overview and General Instructions of Assignment
Students need to use captured Wireshark data to explain the performance of the distributed system behind the given web system. In a report, students need to focus on human-centered design as this is an approach to interactive systems development that aims to make systems usable and useful by focusing on the users, their needs and requirements, and by applying human factors/ergonomics, usability knowledge, and techniques.
Task - 1
From the (MIT lab Network), students need to chase and capture three websites in the table below (Table 1). Students have to analyse the performance for each website with respect to:
? Load Distribution
? Throughput Graph
? Time Sequence Graph
? Flow Graph (Both general and TCP flow)
? Window Scaling Graph
Task - 2
Investigate streaming audio delivery over TCP by listening to Internet live radio and capturing the transmitted packets.
From a second network (home, work, etc.), students have to chase and capture one more website which has an audio stream (such as radio stations, e.g, http://www.abc.net.au/radio/listen-online ) Students are free to choose any website. Show your analysis using TCP Stream Graph and Time Sequences Graph.
Websites Performance Parameters
https://www.9news.com.au/
https://www.cnet.com/au/
https://www.howstuffworks.com/
o Load Distribution o Throughput graph and o Time Sequence graph
o Flow graph (Both general and TCP flow)
o Window scaling graph
Table 1: Websites, analytical tools/performance parameters
NB: You can also demonstrate other statistics that you find to be significant for analysing this network traffic.
Marking Criteria/Report Structure:
Report must have Five sections, each section title as the table below:
Section to be included in the report Description of the section Marks
Introduction Outline of the report 5
Task -1 The significance of the project to given performance parameters. Analyse the topic in terms of network performance. 15
Task -2 Explain briefly the output of the graphs.
Analyse the topic in terms of network performance.
15
Reporting The quality of the report (report style). Grammar and syntax check. 5
Conclusion Write short conclusion to the report. 5
Reference style Follow IEEE reference style.
At least of 5 different references. 5
Total 50
Marking Rubric for Assignment #2: Total Marks 50
Grade Mark HD 40-50 DI 35-44 CR 30-34 P 25-29 Fail 25
Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory
Introduction /5 All topics are pertinent and covered in depth. Ability to think critically and source material is demonstrated Topics are relevant and soundly analysed. Generally relevant and analysed. Some relevance and briefly presented. This is not relevant to the assessment topic.
Task-1
/15 Demonstrated
excellent ability to think critically and sourced reference material appropriately Demonstrated excellent ability to think critically but did not source reference material appropriately Demonstrate
d ability to think critically and sourced reference material appropriately Demonstrated ability to think critically and did not source reference material appropriately Did not demonstrate
ability to think critically and did not source reference material appropriately
Task-2
/15 Logic is clear and easy to follow with strong arguments Consistent, logical and convincing Mostly consisten
t, logical and convincin g Adequate cohesion and conviction Argument is confused and disjointed
Reporting /5 All elements are present and very well integrated. Components present with good cohesive Components present and mostly well integrated Most components present Proposal lacks structure.
Conclusion /5 Excellent use of creditable sources. Accurate referencing. Obvious that outstanding effort
made Extremely good effort Good effort made but not outstanding Made some
effort. For
example, Web searches only Very little attempt to reference. Lazy effort with inaccuracies
Reference style
/5 Clear styles with excellent source of references. Clear referencing style Generally good referencing style Sometimes clear referencing style Lacks consistency with many errors